The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.32619 OF 2022 & W.P.(C) Nos.32621, 32623 & 32626 OF 2022 In W.P.(C) No.32619 of 2022 Nandkishor Mishra …. Petitioner(s) Mr.B.Bhuyan,Adv. -versus- State of Odisha & Ors. ….
Legal Reasoning
Opposite Party(s) Mr.A.P.Bose,Adv. WITH In W.P.(C) No.32621 of 2022 Nandkishor Mishra State of Odisha & Ors. -versus- …. …. Petitioner(s) Mr.B.Bhuyan,Adv. Opposite Party(s) Mr.A.P.Bose,Adv. In W.P.(C) No.32623 of 2022 WITH Nandkishor Mishra … Petitioner(s) -versus- Mr.B.Bhuyan,Adv. State of Odisha & Ors. … Opposite Party(s) Mr. A.P.Bose,Adv. Page 1 of 5 // 2 // In W.P.(C) No.32626 of 2022 WITH Nandkishor Mishra … Petitioner(s) -versus- Mr.B.Bhuyan,Adv. State of Odisha & Ors. Opposite Parties Mr.A.P.Bose,Adv. CORAM: JUSTICE BISWANATH RATH Order No. 13. 1. Heard learned counsel for the Parties.
Decision
ORDER 25.04.2023 2. Undisputedly, a set of proceedings under Section 37(1) of the O.C.H. & P.F.L. Act is pending. There has been also simultaneously a batch of cases vide R.M.C Case Nos.167 of 2022 to 170 of 2022 also appears to be pending. 3. In course of hearing, it has been brought to the notice of the Court that on maintenance of position of the property involved through the direction of this Court dated 14.10.2022 in W.P.(C) No.26686 at paragraphs-3, 4 & 5 observed as follows:- <3. Considering the submission and the accusation against the Additional Tahasildar, this Court finds from the order dated 17.08.2022 this Court finds the order read as follows:- <The case record is put up today. Perused the case record & perused the letter no 69 dt.02.08.2022 of Government Pleader. Sambalpur. He has given his opinion that Tahasildar, Maneswar should have the Revenue Misc. Case filed by the petitioner through his advocate & adjudicate upon the same considering the findings & Page 2 of 5 // 3 // direction made in the order dt. 19.05.2017 of Hon’ble High Court of Orissa and on being satisfied. Tahasildar may pass appropriate order. In view of the above applicant is directed to remain present with his advocate before the undersigned for hiring in the petition.= Undisputedly the case was posted to 06.09.2022. Order-sheet dated 03.09.2022 and 16.09.2022 which reads as follows:- 03.09.2022 <The case is put up today. Perused the case record. On perusal the case record it reveals that the case has been fixed for hearing on the petition dt.06.09.2022. But as per letter No.10264 dt.03.09.2022 of ADM, Sambalpur and based on the memo No.3928 dt.3.9.2022 of Board of Revenue, Odisha, Cuttack, a review meeting has been fixed on dt.6.9.2022 at 11.11 A.M. by the ADM, Sambalpur regarding progress of work under Hi-Tech- Survey- under the above circumstances as the case is adjourned. Case posted to dt.16.9.2022. 16.09.2022 The case is put up today. Perused the case record. On perusal the case record that the objector Nanda Kishor Mishra is present & petitioners are absent and the objector filed an objection petition. Further, in this case it reveals that in W.P.(C) No.157/2017, W.P.(C) No.158/17, W.P.(C) No.159/17 & W.P.(C) No.160/2017, the Hon’ble High Court of Odisha, Cuttack has directed with certain legal paints & the trial will be stated in the Court of Addl. Commissioner, C & S Sambalpur accordingly. Until & unless of the order of the superior Court, the Court of Addl. Tahasildar, Maneswar cannot pass any order in this case. Under the above circumstances, the Misc. petition filed by the petitioner case kept in abeyance until further order.= 4. Considering the serious allegation of the Petitioner that he was unaware of the prepone date as well as subsequent the date, from proceeding 03.09.2022 and remits the matter to the Additional Tahasildar, Maneswar Opposite Party No.3 to the stage on 17.08.2022. illegal preponment of the order onwards this Court finding in interferes Page 3 of 5 // 4 // 5. As a consequence, this Court sets aside both the orders dated 03.09.2022 as well as 16.09.2022 and remits the matter to the Opposite Party No.3 for recommencing the proceeding as per order dated 17.08.2022 and deciding the proceeding in the involvement of the parties concerned. Since the matter is decided in absence and without notice to Opposite Party No.4, for remand order of this Court, Opposite Party No.3 is directed to put Opposite Party No.4 herein to fresh notice and after ensuring appearance of such party recommence the hearing. Hearing may be concluded preferably within a period of three months from the date of appearance of the Parties.= 4. This Court makes it clear that above set of R.M.Cs have been remanded back to the Additional Tahasildar, Maneswar to the stage on 17.08.2022. Consequential order has also been passed directing Opposite Party No.3 to put Opposite Party No.4 therein for fresh notice and freshly adjudicating the proceeding. 5. It is in the circumstance this Court finds for a greater right required to be adjudicated in set of 37(1) proceedings under the provision of O.C.H. & P.F.L. Act, this Court feels it appropriate to stall the R.M.C Case Nos.167 of 2022 to 170 of 2022 at least for two months or till adjudication of the set of 37(1) proceedings involved herein. In the circumstance this Court while staying the set of R.M.C Case Nos.167 of 2022 to 170 of 2022 for two months directs the Commissioner involved in the set of 37(1) proceedings involving Revision Case Nos.1521, 1522, 1523 & 1524 of 2014 to conclude the proceedings within a period of four months. 6. Considering that the Commissioner is going to retire at the end of May, 2023, this Court while directing the Commissioner to conclude the proceeding at least within a period of four weeks, both set of parties are directed to appear before the Commissioner on Page 4 of 5 // 5 // 01.05.2023 and bring the order of this Court to the notice of the Commissioner for his proceeding accordingly. Both parties, keeping in view the urgency and to prevent loss to either side are prevented from taking any adjournment. It is open to the Parties to submit their written note of submissions and support through law on the date of appearance itself. 7. With this observation, the Writ Petitions stand disposed of. (Biswanath Rath) Judge Page 5 of 5